Since Bill has served 2 terms with his wife by his side. Do you believe that the term limitations should or should not apply in this case? The purpose of this term limitation would to insure the presidential office is not abused. It would seem to me this law needs to be re-written to include situations like this. It should be written such that no husband and wife are allowed to serve more than 2 terms as President. I just think there is a stong potential for abuse since she has been in this situation before.
Any thoughts?
2007-01-20 12:56:31 · 9 answers · asked by John H 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
there is no talk about wives counting for the two terms
she isn't going to win john don't get ahead of yourself
2007-01-20 12:59:01 · answer #1 · answered by SWANY 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Someone already asked something similar (if Bill Clinton could be the VP). I don't think it should be rewritten just because people think that both a wife and husband could serve as president. Yes, there always the chance of abuse (look at how much the current administration has abused their power), but you can't discriminate against a candidate just because their spouse is a former president.
2007-01-21 06:29:38 · answer #2 · answered by milwaukiedave 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Just because you don't like her doesn't mean the laws should be rewritten to suit you. Hillary served as first lady, not president. However, that does give her a little more experience as to the goings on in the white house, and the fact that her husband served as president & now has potential to be the former president and first gentleman and BTW, a free advisor is definetly an advantage for the US. We should be so lucky!
2007-01-20 21:07:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
G.W. served one term as the son of a president before he becamse President himself. Does that mean he should have been prevented from serving a second term as president, since he was at his father's side during his presidency?
Of course, it's too late to do anything about that. I think that a new ammendment should be written to prevent political dynasties by preventing anyone within one generation of a former president's direct relations by blood. We came to America to escape facist monarchies, not start new ones.
2007-01-20 21:10:52 · answer #4 · answered by Adam N 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Hillary was not the president and was not elected as such. To say that Bill's term limits should apply to her is wrong. She is an individual unto herself, she is not his puppet nor is she his property.
If she wins she does it on her own terms. So no, the rule does not apply.
You could use the same argument to say that W. should have only had one term because his father was president for one term.
2007-01-20 21:01:14 · answer #5 · answered by rehobothbeachgui 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i dont believe that there is a loop hole. She was the president's wife she was not our president. Maybe in a sense it would be a good thing because she would know what she is dealing with. And maybe just maybe we can have someone who actually cares about our country, instead of this prick that we have now that should have never have made it into office.
she has my vote.
are u for or against a woman as president.
2007-01-22 23:59:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
SHE has never been the PRESIDENT. Term limits apply to individuals, not couples.
I will say that I hope God has a plan if that ignorant witch actually becomes president. God Help Us All.
2007-01-20 21:00:28 · answer #7 · answered by Starla_C 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
She has never served as President. THere is no reason she would not be allowed to serve.
2007-01-20 21:00:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is just moronic.
Is your arguement that she is the same person as Bill Clinton, or that she was acting as the president?
I'm not sure which one of those suggestions is more stupid.
2007-01-20 21:00:44 · answer #9 · answered by trader_dude_turned_surfer 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋